In recent years, the escalation of aggression carried out by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in the South China Sea has created uncertainty and serious challenges to regional stability. China’s aggressive actions, such as sinking Vietnamese fishing vessels, intimidating Malaysia’s offshore energy exploration, and deploying naval forces around the Philippines, show that China is assertively projecting its power and trying to establish its dominance in the region. The implications are very broad, not only limited to direct threats to coastal countries but also to regional stability as a whole. China’s increasingly aggressive tactics signal a significant shift in power dynamics in the region. The choice to strengthen its territorial claims through military action and rejection of the principles of international law raises the risk of conflict that could harm all parties. China’s efforts to dominate the South China Sea not only create uncertainty at the regional level but also increase global tensions involving key stakeholders such as the United States.
Although China’s foreign policy is often illustrated by rhetoric emphasizing partnership and mutual prosperity, actions on the ground demonstrate non-compliance with the principles of international law. The rejection of the 2016 Arbitration Court ruling rejecting Beijing’s nine-line maritime claim is a concrete example of this behavior. ASEAN countries, together with the United States, have firmly stated the importance of upholding the principles of UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea) as a legal basis that is fair and just. China’s non-compliance with UNCLOS creates legal uncertainty in the region. This can hinder the peaceful resolution of disputes and open opportunities for conflict escalation. Disregard for the international legal framework could also damage China’s international reputation and hinder its efforts to build an image as a responsible global leader. The South China Sea is not only a vital trade route but is also rich in natural resources, especially oil and gas. China, with its aggressive actions, is trying to dominate this sector, forcing littoral countries to accept “joint development” agreements that ultimately harm them economically. The implications are wide-ranging, including economic uncertainty, potential conflicts of interest, and threats to regional peace.
The sustainability of overall global economic growth is also threatened by conflict in the South China Sea. Being a trade route worth trillions of dollars each year, any tensions that affect the smooth flow of trade in this region can spread throughout the world. Countries that depend on trade flows through the South China Sea, including the United States, have a big interest in maintaining the economic stability of this region. The response and solidarity from ASEAN coastal countries is an important factor in responding to Chinese aggression. Joint exercises such as the “ASEAN Solidarity Exercise Natuna” signify joint efforts to increase security and solidarity in the region. ASEAN’s statement emphasizing dispute resolution based on international law reflects its commitment to maintaining the principles of peace and justice.
The United States’ role in supporting a free and open Indo-Pacific is key in balancing China’s influence. Official statements from United States officials, as expressed by Secretary of State Pompeo, show that the United States not only insists on protecting its national interests but is also ready to help partners in Southeast Asia to defend their sovereign rights. United States engagement in the region could have a significant impact on China’s strategic calculations and encourage constructive dialogue. The move of the training location from the North Natuna Sea to the South Natuna Islands reflects an effort to prevent an escalation of conflict with China. Diplomacy remains the main instrument in responding to conflicts in the South China Sea. While this transfer can be considered a precautionary measure, it is worth noting that long-term stability requires a solution that involves open dialogue and intensive diplomatic talks. A series of exercises like this, apart from the security aspect, also has a social dimension. The social services held along the exercise route show that this effort is not only directed at military aspects but also at creating social and humanitarian ties between ASEAN countries. Diplomacy focused on conflict prevention can create a stronger foundation for future cooperation. In the face of the escalation of the People’s Republic of China’s aggression in the South China Sea, the ASEAN Solidarity Exercise is an important milestone in overcoming the complex dynamics and challenges of regional stability. ASEAN’s tactical steps in responding to Chinese aggression through this exercise reflect collective efforts to evaluate and strengthen joint strategies.
Looking at this situation from various dimensions, several aspects need to be analyzed in depth. First of all, China’s increasing aggression in the South China Sea is a crucial background for carrying out this solidarity exercise. Aggressive actions, such as the sinking of Vietnamese fishing vessels and intimidation of Malaysian exploration, created significant tensions. This exercise can be interpreted as ASEAN’s response to the continuous escalation of aggression, illustrating the need to evaluate and strengthen collective measures in dealing with such threats. Second, the United States’ emphasis on the principles of freedom, openness and justice in the South China Sea is a determining factor in its participation in this solidarity exercise. Secretary Pompeo’s remarks reflect the US commitment to supporting partners and allies in the region, striking a balance against the hegemonic ambitions projected by China. In this analysis, the role of the United States is a key element in designing a collective response strategy to aggression in the South China Sea. Third, aspects of international law, especially the 2016 Arbitration Court decision which rejected China’s nine-dash line claim, are the basis for legitimacy for ASEAN’s actions. Although China refuses to recognize the ruling, continued support from the United States and other countries reinforces the importance of maintaining fair and just principles of maritime law. Fourth, the economic and resource impacts of the South China Sea are crucial factors in this analysis. China seeks to dominate the region’s oil and gas resources, forcing coastal states to accept “joint development” deals that harm them economically. This solidarity exercise can be interpreted as ASEAN’s attempt to protect their economic interests and resources from China’s expansionist ambitions. Fifth, the reaction and solidarity of ASEAN coastal countries is an important indicator in analyzing the impact of this exercise. The ASEAN Solidarity Exercise Natuna reflects coordination and cooperation among ASEAN members to increase security and solidarity in the South China Sea. ASEAN’s statement emphasizing dispute resolution based on international law also provides a strong basis for a collective response to aggression. Sixth, TNI Commander Admiral Yudo Margono’s statement regarding the purpose of this solidarity exercise needs special attention. Calling it a manifestation of the sense of solidarity initiated at the ASEAN Defense Force Meeting and as a diplomatic step to maintain and maintain stability in the region, highlights the importance of joint efforts in responding to complex challenges in the South China Sea. In view of this situation, the ASEAN Solidarity Exercise creates an important spotlight in the context of the dynamics of the South China Sea and its impact on regional stability. This overall analysis illustrates that this exercise is not only a response to Chinese aggression but also a strategic step to strengthen regional solidarity in facing complex challenges in the South China Sea region.
The author’s views on the escalation of the People’s Republic of China’s aggression in the South China Sea, as well as the responses of ASEAN and the United States, reflect a complex understanding from the perspective of International Relations Theory. In this analysis, the author highlights elements of realism, liberalism, constructivism, and national security theory to detail the dynamics of international relations in the region. China’s rejection of the principles of international law, its aggressive actions, and its drive to project its power according to a realist view, while ASEAN’s reaction to promoting a peaceful settlement and the United States’ support for the rule of law of the sea reflect a liberal and constructivist approach. The author’s views emphasize the need to embrace multiple theoretical perspectives to understand the complexity of the conflict in the South China Sea, and as revealed through this analysis, identify a balanced and effective foreign policy strategy in maintaining regional stability and peace.
Its unit, “ASEAN Solidarity Exercise Natuna,” reflects ASEAN’s concrete steps in responding to the People’s Republic of China’s escalation of aggression in the South China Sea. In essence, this exercise is the main stage to show solidarity and coordination among ASEAN countries in facing increasingly complex security challenges in the region. By highlighting strategic aspects, including China’s increasing aggression, the role of the United States, and the basis of international law, this exercise is a concrete manifestation of our collective determination to maintain regional stability. The shift in training locations from the North Natuna Sea to the South Natuna Islands confirms that diplomacy remains the main tool in responding to tensions, while creating space for constructive dialogue and negotiations. In this way, the unit is not only a military exercise, but also a symbol of ASEAN’s joint efforts in creating a balance of power and maintaining peace in the South China Sea.